Flexible Working

Tjrw1985

Hope someone can help with the following:

My sister-in-law has just been declined flexible working on the grounds of her company do not know what the business needs will be when she requires flexible working.

My understanding was in order to decline a flexible working request the business had to give you a valid business reason for it?

She has requested this after going back to work after having her 2nd Child. Her eldest who is now 3 starts school in September and is a type 1 diabetic so requested shorter hours as he needs someone to look after him when he finishes school for the day.

Can someone please help?

Jarndyce

The refusal has to be on one of the statutory grounds, listed here:

http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1081563910&type=RESOURCES

although that is fairly easily done. ALthough if they haven't it is certainly worth appealing.

Bear in mind also that as a mother of a child with Diabetes, she is covered by the Equality Act. She has the right to ask for reasonable adjustments and not to be discriminated against. Worth a shot also.

Tjrw1985

Thanks for the quick reply.

The wording they have used is as follws:

2. I am afraid that we must refuse your request for flexible working from September 2012 onwards. We cannot know what our business needs will be with certainty 10 months ahead, but consider that it is very likely that we shall wish to implement structural changes before then. In addition there is the prospect of insufficiency of work during the period when you propose to work, in view of the increasing pressures on legal practices such as ours from various sources.

The part I have underlined says to me that if she insists on these hours they will have no option but to make her redundant. Is potential planned structural change a valid reason as they have not confirmed it will happen.

SarEl

I am afraid that declining a request for flexible working which is 10 months in advance of the time is entirely reasonable. Any employer can decline to give an agreement to a request made 10 months in advance, whatever the circumstances! It is entirely reasonable for the employer to say that there may be changes to the workplace or to the workload during that period of time, and that they cannot make commitments so far in advance. The part that you have underlined may say that to you. It doesn't say that to me though, and it doesn't say it at all. It says that they may wish to consider structural changes over the next ten months and that they are concerned about a downturn in business which may force them to consider redundancies over the coming period. It may be that by the time next September comes the employer may in fact be happy to look at reduced hours from employees. Nobody can predict that. Including the employer.

Jarndyce

No! She has no right to insist on those hours. If the company have valid business reasons, and quite frankly it is very easy to construct them, then that is it. If she does insist, then she is dismissing herself and she will not be redundant. The only way that there could be a redundancy is if there is a genuine need for less staff in her area of work, in which case, her wish to do shorter hours could be of benefit to the employer anyway.

The only other avenue, and I stress it is a risky one, is to play the disability card. If she starts - carefully - bandying around words like Equality Act and diabetic child, etc etc they just might concede. Ideally, she needs to be in a union and have someone doing this for her.

But SarEl is right - it is too far in advance for the employer to reasonably be able to predict their needs. She should have waited and submitted the request nearer the point of her return.

Tjrw1985

Ok. Thank you for that.

skintandscared_2

If there are redundancies during her maternity leave she should bear in mind that the law requires she is offered any of the remaining positions IN PREFERENCE to other candidates. It's not actually something I personally agree with, but apparently it IS the law.

Jarndyce

skintandscared wrote: »

If there are redundancies during her maternity leave she should bear in mind that the law requires she is offered any of the remaining positions IN PREFERENCE to other candidates. It's not actually something I personally agree with, but apparently it IS the law.

Yes - its not quite that black and white following recent case law developments - she would need to actively engage with the employer in identifying alternative positions in order for that requirement to kick in, but it is a good point. I think the legal establishment shares your concerns about this requirement sas!

KiKi

She's not on her maternity leave, though - she's back at work and requesting flexible hours from Sep 2012 - it's unreasonable to expect the business to know what their needs will be by then. She needs to re-apply nearer the time.

KiKi

mildred1978

Who in earth advised her to put on the request so early?! I think you can only put 1 request in per year, so she may well have screwed herself.

(speaking of which, I'm sure she would think it unreasonable if her employer asked what her plans were for next september. She could have had another baby and be on may leave again by then!!)

Emmzi

Even if she got her request now it's an annual review - request good for 12 months - so she may get the hours Sept - Dec and then stuffed when the company review and recind.

There is no point to the request at the present time, it won't really mean anything.